1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to systems of learning and recognition, specifically methods and systems for computer based learning and games which combine means of rehearsal and entertainment with social utility.
2. Description of Prior Art
Following the events of Sep. 11, 2001, security has become of paramount importance to all people. The world can be a dangerous place, with the presence of terrorists, criminals, sex offenders and other undesirable individuals. Government has spent billions attempting to increase our security, such as creating new organizations like the Department of Homeland Security and increasing funding to police and intelligence organizations. However, day after day we turn on the news and are greeted with a high terrorist threat or other threats to our well being. A sex offender just molested another child. A terrorist escaped apprehension. Another person is missing. A vehicle was stolen. The barrage is endless. The average citizen cannot help but think more can and must be done.
Megan's Law and Sex Offender Registries
Megan's Law is an example of government attempts to increase security. In 1995, a convicted child molester was arrested for the rape and murder of 7-year-old Megan Kanka. The offender lived right across the street from Megan. However, the police were not allowed to disclose the presence of this child molester because release of this information was prohibited. Since this tragic event, the laws have been changed to permit the release of this type of information to the public. In remembrance of Megan Kanka, President Clinton signed Megan's Law on May 8, 1996. This law was implemented to allow potential victims to protect themselves and allow parents to protect their children. Many states and private groups now provide sex offender data, such as photographs and physical characteristics on the internet.
Although Megan's Law sounds effective on the surface, the actual results fall short of the intent. The Associated Press reported on Feb. 6, 2003 that states are losing sex offenders. Laura Ahern, from the organization of Parents for Megan's Law, summed up the situation, “They're implementing Megan's Law, then turning their backs on it.” States on average are unable to account for about one quarter of sex offenders. California alone was revealed to have lost track of over 33,000 sex offenders based on an Associated Press investigation. These offenders are required to notify authorities of their address once a year, yet they are not, and our police organizations are stretched thin already. Something is needed to make Megan's Law more effective.
Not all states currently have the sex offender internet registries. Let us assume that a state has an internet registry that has nearly all of its sex offenders properly registered. That information is of little use if the public doesn't have access to the internet, know which internet site to access, and is able to download pertinent data and review it.
The existing sex offender registries lack features to ensure users are protected. The existing methods require a person to log on to the internet, find the appropriate websites, manually download data, and review the information. Unfortunately, the concerned citizen will find no uniformity amongst sex offender and other databases. Additionally, accessing these data sources manually can require large amounts of time. If a parent wants to ensure a child is protected from a criminal, the parent must ensure the child recognizes the visual image or characteristics of the criminal. This involves overseeing the child at the computer or printing hard copies of the data, then manually reviewing the data.
How many parents review the sex offender images with their children? How many parents do it repetitively and whenever a new offender moves to their area? And, how many separate presentations of the visual and characteristic data are required to ensure recognition? Parents cannot be with their children twenty-four hours a day. Although police are given the task of notifying people and organizations of high risk offenders in their area, we know that our police forces are stretched thin and one quarter of offenders aren't living where they are supposed to.
Government Versus Public Access
Supply and demand are two factors in any exchange. In this case, the prior art on the supply side (law enforcement and governmental agencies) is more developed than the demand side (the general population). In searches of existing systems, several database and tracking software systems were uncovered on the supply side of law enforcement. Such systems as Intelligent Sex Offender Registry (ISOR), Technology to Recover Abducted Kids (TRAK), and “Stop It!” sex offender software were developed for government agencies. As one of the companies states in its advertisement, the system is “designed for law enforcement, by law enforcement.” These systems are not available to the public—the inventor was not able to order a brochure on these products without being a government agency.
Expensive Alerting Systems With Limited Success
U.S. Pat. No. 5,912,947 to Langenskamp, et al. (1999) discloses a public notification system with automated calls delivering a recorded message prompting the callee to provide input into the phone. Based on the callee input, the system may provide data on convicted criminals close to the callee's address. Unfortunately, the barrage of telemarketing has put most people on notice to telephone intrusions into the home. This is a push type of system, compared to a pull system responding to a person's desire for information when they desire it. Use of the phone to convey information through recorded messages is limited, and graphical and other characteristic data such as hardcopy is wanting.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,084,510 to Lemelson, et al. (2001) discloses an emergency response and danger warning system using GPS location signals used with various surveillance systems to detect dangerous situations. Information concerning dangerous situations which exist or may develop and threaten people is transmitted to a command control center which, in-turn, relays broadcast warning messages via satellites and/or communication networks to remote warning devices. This system is quite elaborate, requiring surveillance platforms, command centers, and individual GPS beepers to respond to a situation occurring or about to occur. If one were stuck in a traffic jam and alerted by beeper about that traffic jam, the warning would not be of much use.
More examples of emergency alerting systems are found in U.S. Pat. No. 5,278,539 to Lauterbach, et al. (1994); U.S. Pat. No. 4,993,059 to Smith, et al. (1991); and U.S. Pat. No. 4,887,291 to Stillwell (1989). These various systems make use of facility alarm sensors that are used to relay warning signals to appropriate control centers via transmission links. Cellular radio links are often used for such emergency communications. These systems do little to prevent incidents and they are expensive after the fact attempts to address the security problem.
There are many more elaborate devices attempting to provide security. Such existing systems as facial recognition software, video surveillance, Global Positioning System (GPS) wireless locator systems, and others require expensive systems that are out of reach of the average citizen. Even with the government and industry procuring these devices, the average taxpayer must eventually shoulder the burden.
The following prior art reference put a little levity into a sober topic. The device's scientific name is “The Creep Beeper” and it is strapped onto sex offenders. With such a device name, it would have to be strapped on.
“It looks just like a wristwatch. But this would-be Rolex measures changes in pulse rate, skin temperature and adrenaline. Just think of it like those 1970sera mood rings—only this accessory really says if you are about to blow your top. When the sex offender becomes agitated, an alarm signals authorities, and presumably, they can go out after the guy with their butterfly nets.
‘This is a chance to help a troubled person, just when he needs it most,’says inventor Dr. Eike Winckler of the Berlin Institute for Stress Research. ‘At the same time, the community will be safer.”’
Despite its interesting name, this device has serious limitations in addition to cost and having a “scarlet letter” strapped to an unwilling person. As one researcher noted, “Unfortunately, everyone encounters normal day-to-day stress. Until further testing, it's unclear whether this gadget will go off each time a sex offender opens his Visa bill.” Frequent false alarms combined with other limitations make this device an impractical, entertaining oddity.
Entertainment and Games
Television is one entertainment avenue of reaching a large audience to present information of a person or object of interest. Some television programs, such as “America's Most Wanted,” distribute information about fugitives and also about missing children. However, given the high cost of television, only limited time can be spent on any one person, which reduces chances for recognition of featured individuals. After the program has aired, recognition of individuals relies solely on this limited exposure to the audience. Additionally, a television program is a push type medium, aired at rigid times without audience control. If a person is at work or has another commitment, the information will be missed. Even if the person is available to watch television, there are literally hundreds of other programs on to distract the viewer.
Radio is another well-known medium that has no ability to distribute the visual data crucial for recognition. In recent times, radio is reaching a smaller audience as other forms of entertainment vie for audience share. For these reasons, radio in its current state is not suited for identifying people and objects of interest.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,491,297 to Cardoso (2002) discloses a method for locating individuals by providing pictures of the sought individuals on lottery game cards. Unfortunately, this method combines the potential vice of gambling with the altruistic motive of locating people. For that matter, one could place a picture of a missing child on a pack of cigarettes or a bottle of beer. It is another example of information overload on an overwhelmed, unsympathetic public.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,012,045 to Vail (1977) discloses a question and answer game involving the field of criminal justice. U.S. Pat. No. 4,039,192 to Magiera (1977) discloses a card and board game apparatus for simulating the stages of the legal process of a criminal case. U.S. Pat. No. 4,714,255 to Pope (1987) discloses a question and answer game involving criminal justice. British patent number GB 2,227,420 to Smith (1990) discloses an apparatus for playing a game that relates to the successful undertaking of criminal tasks. French patent number FR 2,619,020 relates to a law-based game corresponding to civil or criminal suit cases and bearing corresponding judgments. Canadian patent number CA 1,067,920 discloses a card and board game apparatus for simulating the various stages of the legal process of a criminal case.
With litigation costs reaching new levels, an aspiring pro se person may use such games to acquire just enough knowledge to be dangerous. A comparison could be made to playing the game “Operation” and then considering oneself a competent surgeon. With limited utility and excitement, it is no wonder such games have not come close to the success of a game like “Monopoly.”
The Public is the Key
Unfortunately, such cases as the Washington D.C. snipers indicate clearly that public knowledge and involvement are essential elements of our security. With hundreds of billions expended and our entire government, military and intelligence agencies engaged in the effort, unsettling questions arise in our war on terrorism and overriding desire for security. Could we have prevented September 11th? How many sleeper cells are lying dormant until they strike us again? When will we, the public, feel secure again? It is humbling that the raw, unchained energy of a powerful nation is unable to resolve these potent threats.
Disadvantages of the Prior Art
All of the systems, methods, and apparatus mentioned thus far suffer from one or more disadvantages:
(a) They are expensive and require extensive hardware solutions, placing them out of reach of most of the populace.
(b) They are a “push type” system—providing information rigidly and without the user's consent or input.
(c) They require an extensive amount of law enforcement involvement and effort.
(d) They combine an undesirable activity, such as gambling, with the desirable outcome of altruism and security.
(e) They are not very effective in solving the need. A haphazard “shot in the dark” image on a television may simply not reach the right person.
(f) They do not present information in such a way as it will be recalled when needed.
(g) They rely on data sources which are not being kept up to date due to lack of manpower and public interest.
(h) They are not fulfilling or entertaining enough to ensure people will use them on a continual basis.
(i) They require extensive involvement and time by the user to be effective.
(j) They are based on questionable research and science.
(k) They violate civil freedoms of certain individuals.
(I) They do not leverage the public demand side to solve problems.
It is readily apparent there is a dire need for a system that overcomes these disadvantages and provides enhanced security for all people.